News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by iamwil on Monday May 10, 2010 @11:54AM (#1334784)
Google was a silly name for a while, and what do we think of it now?

Here, I'll invoke "Tara"

"The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act." - Tara Ploughman

Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by cookiecaper on Monday May 10, 2010 @12:14PM (#1334858)
Well, "Google" rolls off the tongue much easier than "Duck Duck Go". "Duck Duck Go" is also hard to "verb", as it were. I don't have a problem with the mentioned silliness of the name, I just think it's too long and hard to say/write.
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by epi0Bauqu on Monday May 10, 2010 @12:17PM (#1334875)
Duck it! Working on shorter domain names...we have dukgo, though that isn't that memorable. I hope to have something soon though.
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by axod on Monday May 10, 2010 @12:37PM (#1334968)
I'd say get something that you can easily say, spell, and use as a verb.

bloip gibbit erdle jopple etc etc But rebranding does seem a big job to me.

It's amazingly motivating when you start seeing your startups name appearing as a verb on twitter searches :)

Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by mattmaroon on Monday May 10, 2010 @01:08PM (#1335155)
Rebranding is not too difficult if you don't get much traffic from organic search. It's a simple redirect and a notice on the page.

It's also not too difficult when you're small but gets more costly as time goes on. If DDG succeeds, the customer base it has now will be something like .00001% of it's users.

Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by niyazpk on Tuesday May 11, 2010 @08:46AM (#1337615)
How would you like voidy.com?
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by iamwil on Monday May 10, 2010 @12:45PM (#1335007)
not really. I'd just say I'd "DDG" it, or "double D", or "duck" it.

In the same way, I just type I'd 'fb' someone for 'facebook' someone.

It only rolls off the tongue because you're so use to it now. Same with other brand named that got verbed. Kleenex. Xerox., etc.

Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by axod on Monday May 10, 2010 @01:50PM (#1335320)
Double D would actually be pretty good brand. Could have a large breasted woman as the mascot.
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by mattmaroon on Monday May 10, 2010 @11:25PM (#1336772)
That's called Evony.
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by philwelch on Monday May 10, 2010 @01:43PM (#1335295)
I think if Duck Duck Go went with "double D" as their verb, they'd have to commit to a GoDaddy-style marketing campaign....
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by aantix on Monday May 10, 2010 @12:26PM (#1334920)
Who is Tara Ploughman?

The seriousness of DDG is to make damn sure that when someone types in the word 'dog' or some other simple search test, that pointed, relevant results are returned. And for that DDG seems to be getting better at each day.

He's been very upfront about who he is (one man operation) with zero interests in storing personal tracking information (the antithesis of Google).

He is serious.

Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by jcl on Monday May 10, 2010 @12:35PM (#1334958)
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by nanijoe on Monday May 10, 2010 @01:21PM (#1335200)
Funny, the top result is the above HN post
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by jcl on Monday May 10, 2010 @02:14PM (#1335427)
Really? For me, the top result is an HN post from a year ago that precisely answers the question: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=554889
Re:Let me Duck Duck Go that for you by philwelch on Monday May 10, 2010 @01:42PM (#1335290)
Anagram of Tara Ploughman: "Not Paul Graham".

Before the advent of Twitter, pg would attribute quotes to Tara Ploughman when he wanted to write one-sentence essays. (Since the advent of Twitter, he curiously has stopped writing one-sentence essays.)